Section 132 of the CGST Act, 2017 — Anticipatory Bail -  The Applicant sought pre-arrest bail in respect of the offence punishable under Section 132 of the Act. The counsel for the applicant submitted that the offence is punishable with the maximum punishment for 5 years and are compoundable. The applicant has no concern with erring Company. Only on the basis of the some whatsapp messages which have no evidentiary value and statements of the accused that the applicant is being implicated. The court observed that on the basis of the materials, the first respondent is justified in contending that it is necessary to record the statement of the applicant to find out his involvement in the case. The applicant has not attended office despite issuing summons on 20/5/2022, 30/5/2022 and 3/6/2022 and he is not cooperating with the investigation. The present application is premature and the apprehension that the applicant will be arrested without following due procedure of law is unfounded. The first respondent is bound to comply with the mandate of the law and upon adhering to the dictum laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court before effecting arrest.

Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court rejected the application as premature and reserved the liberty of the applicant to apply for anticipatory bail, at a later stage. The first respondent will issue a fresh witness summons to the applicant for the purpose of recording his statement and to verify the books of accounts. The applicant must attend. If the applicant does not attend pursuant to issuance of witness summons, it is open for the first respondent to proceed in accordance with law.